Guest Post: Muslim Refugees in Southland

www.telegraph.co.uk858 × 536Search by imageSlovenia called on the European Union to take immediate action to stem the flow of refugees

Yesterday, Invercargill residents awoke to discover that they have been selected to host an influx of Muslim refugees. Joyous news for sure.

This selection was made by consulting New Zealand Immigration and the Red Cross among others. On that list, they appeared to miss consulting with the most important people of all: The citizens of Invercargill.

Immigration NZ and the Red Cross cynically present the selection as if Invercargill has won a fabulous prize. Yet, being selected for Muslim refugees is like being selected for herpes. It’s a condition that flares up randomly to remind you how stupid you were for the rest of your life.

“University of Otago foundation chair of Peace and Conflict Studies Professor Kevin Clements said refugees, like all immigrants, had a positive contribution to make.

‘Although they enjoy a different immigration status to regular immigrants, refugees are no different in that they help create a cosmopolitan and pluralistic society by bringing their food, culture and work patterns with them to New Zealand. These are things we can learn from for the good,’ he said.”

Does Professor Clements think it’s a good idea to import notoriously hostile cultures just because he doesn’t like the food here? Why can’t he just buy a cookbook? What a selfish imbecile.

Then there is the constant reference to cultural enrichment these dolts like to make. I don’t know if Professor Clements is paying attention to the news, but Muslim culture has absolutely nothing to teach us. There’s a reason why these people are trying to flood into Western nations instead of Europeans trying to enter places like Syria and Somalia. But I don’t know, maybe Professor Clements has a weird fetish for female genital mutilation and child brides as cultural enrichment that we’re missing.

Certainly, Southland is not cosmopolitan to Professor Clement’s liking either. Yet, did anyone ask if the people want to be what he thinks is cosmopolitan? France is very cosmopolitan and diverse now and they have machine gun-toting soldiers on the beaches and street corners. They also have Sharia law, no-go zones for police, and terror attacks happening weekly at this point.

Sweden has seen a massive spike in rapes and assaults. It had a truck attack that killed and injured many just a couple weeks ago. Sweden also boasts the largest number of grenade attacks a year outside of an active war zone. You can’t get more cosmopolitan than a grenade coming through your window.

If Professor Clements wants to experience a cosmopolitan culture, he can buy a plane ticket and go experience it himself. Do that instead of insulting us about how non-cosmopolitan and non-explosive we are.

“Venture Southland business project manager Robin McNeill said gaining refugee settlement status was the latest in a series of positive developments for Invercargill and Southland. ‘It’s good for the Southland economy, it’s good for Southland culture and it’s good for the refugees – it’s good for everyone,’ Mr McNeill said.

When did importing people with no skills, no ability to speak the language, a radically different culture, and almost 100% chance of living on benefits the rest of their lives become good for the economy and people that live here? If Robin McNeil believes that’s the bar for success, no wonder Venture Southland hasn’t accomplished much under his direction.

Let’s hear more from the powerful penetrating intellect of Robin McNeil.

“Gaining more refugees would clearly be positive for the Southland economy and would also benefit other Invercargill citizens by further adding to the city’s ethnic diversity and vibrancy.”

Ok, Robin, we get it, you hate white people and want to live somewhere more diverse. It’s amazing he can walk down the streets of Invercargill without committing suicide from the evil that surrounds him. Of course, he can walk down the street safely at all hours of the day too (something you can’t do in diverse and vibrant cities in America and Europe), but that’s pure coincidence.

I wonder, if these refugees are a positive as always claimed, then why aren’t their Muslim neighbours fighting to take them in? Who could pass up such an amazing opportunity for diversity and vibrancy? Not to mention the sheer number of physicists and brilliant doctors the left says these people flooding in contain? Saudi Arabia is a fool for passing up the opportunity and clearly is missing their chance to get their own space program underway.

Mr McNeil and Professor Clements must not know that the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has 57 member states. Fifty-seven! And for some reason, it has become a burden of the West to take in the cast-offs from Muslim wars instead of Muslim countries where these people would fit in culturally and have far fewer problems integrating. If they are so valuable why aren’t well-funded countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and other oil producing nations raking in all that latent talent? These are questions open border advocates just can’t (or won’t) answer.

The lecturing tone in these statements reveals also the disdain the left has for the culture and people that created the society they enjoy. What exactly is wrong with New Zealand culture that Professor Clements, Robin McNeil, and others think it’s going to be improved by importing a 6th-century religious-political belief system that has quashed human progress wherever it has gone?

Lastly, when I see a charity pushing refugee resettlement I know to look for the money. In the United States, refugee resettlement is big business with hundreds of millions (or billions) at stake each year. Each new body these organisations bring in means more money for their salaries. It pays to be cynical. In New Zealand, I was suspicious that the Red Cross is also in on the racket, and sure enough, they appear to be doing just that.

“Our work with refugees in New Zealand is now a major activity with expenditure of $5.3 million largely funded by government contracts.”

Refugee resettlement is a major activity that brings the Red Cross money from the government. Besides government contracts, the Red Cross profits from donations around this issue. I have to wonder, is the Red Cross diverting funds given to them for earthquake relief to impose refugees on these towns across New Zealand which was not the reason why people donated to them? They appear to be doing God’s work, and God pays very well.

After a year of refugee support, the Red Cross leaves and then who pays? The Red Cross must not be aware that the average human lifespan is over 70 years. They participate for one of those years, but who pays for the rest?

I think at this point we should get an answer from Immigration New Zealand and the Red Cross as to exactly how much they are paid per refugee they resettle. I think it would also be good to hear from the Red Cross that money not explicitly given to them for refugees should not be used for refugee resettlement that is a detriment to NZ citizens.

Certainly, I won’t be donating any money to them because I do not want it used to dump muslim refugees into places where they will be a net drain or, even worse, could victimise my countrymen.

Aside from the sudden decision to impose this burden on Southlanders and other Kiwis, the entire refugee resettlement racket reeks of leftist fart sniffing and pieties. It’s just the kind of thing they can brag about with each other at wine parties held far away from the effects that their policies have on mere mortals. It’s virtue signaling without the responsibility.

The most critical point is that which is unsaid. The arguments against refugee resettlement that are allowed to be presented in the news and political debates are weak sauce economics. Not enough housing, not enough jobs, not enough health care. But the most pressing issue which we have been denied the ability to say is simply that Muslim refugees are a horrible fit with New Zealand culture and represent a very serious national and personal security threat to New Zealand citizens. This is the lesson every other country on the planet has discovered already and New Zealand will, too.

We are denied the ability to take our own side as the people that built the country, culture, and way of life we enjoy today. We are denied the ability to simply say: We don’t want these people here because history has shown they are nothing but trouble elsewhere. Go away.

And that is the most important point for those in the fight against the open borders left need to learn. If you are not going to take your own side, nobody else will.

-Name withheld by request

Do you want:

Ad-free access?

Access to our very popular daily crossword?

Access to daily sudoku?

Access to Incite Politics magazine articles?

Access to podcasts?

Access to political polls?

Our subscribers’ financial support is the reason why we have been able to offer our latest service; Audio blogs.

As much at home writing editorials as being the subject of them, Cam has won awards, including the Canon Media Award for his work on the Len Brown/Bevan Chuang story. When he’s not creating the news, he tends to be in it, with protagonists using the courts, media and social media to deliver financial as well as death threats.

They say that news is something that someone, somewhere, wants kept quiet. Cam Slater doesn’t do quiet and, as a result, he is a polarising, controversial but highly effective journalist who takes no prisoners.